Couldn’t see your reply fully before it got hidden but here’s my source for Patty saying pedophiles are a thing made by white people to maintain ownership of children
I'll try to answer this in good faith (even though I'm skeptical that you are capable of acting in good faith), but as I expected, this screenshot doesn't read to me as Patty defending, downplaying, or denying the existence or severity of child sex abuse; this reads as a critique of several flawed ideas about child safety, and the public narrative surrounding pedophilia.
Are you familiar with the concept of "stranger danger"- the notion that there are adults lurking on every street corner, waiting for hapless children to abduct, abuse, or even kill? It's an enduring narrative, taught to children from a very young age for decades now, warning them to be constantly vigilant and wary of any adult that they don't already know. You could argue that it was spawned directly from the Satanic Panic- and, just like the Satanic Panic, it's mostly a product of exaggeration and mass hysteria. Both are convenient bogeymen, created to avoid facing the actual, difficult truth: that the greatest threats to the safety of children come not from complete strangers, but from the very adults and authority figures that the children are supposed to trust. It's easier to invent an entire class of largely mythological prowling psychopaths whose entire purpose in life is to hurt children than it is to reckon with the power structures that allow parents, churches, schools, and law enforcement to abuse children and get away with it.
This brings us to the concept of pedophiles- or rather, as Patricia puts it, "the specter of the pedophile". It's absolutely true that pedophiles- adults who are sexually attracted to children- exist. It's also true that pedophiles can, and frequently do, sexually abuse children- like the strangers warned of in lessons about "stranger danger", even if the prevalence of the danger is exaggerated and prone to sensationalization, that doesn't mean it isn't real. However, also as with stranger danger, the harder truth is that the majority of adults who sexually abuse children do so not as a result of attraction, but (as is often the case with all forms of sexual abuse) as an expression of power. As a result, any measures that claim to be trying to protect children from sexual abuse by solely focusing on the potential threat posed by potential pedophiles while ignoring the vastly more substantial threat posed by authority figures will be, at best, inadequate at mitigating CSA. In order to meaningfully prevent CSA, children need to feel safe telling others about the harm they have faced, to feel safe telling adults "no" without being coerced or threatened into silence- and to reach that point requires empowering children with greater autonomy, while also ensuring that adults have less power to control and abuse children.
Unfortunately, we don't live in a society where the autonomy of children is considered a priority, or even desirable. I don't know where you live, but I live in the USA- a nation run for centuries by rich white Christofascists who believe that their children (as well as any other children that they have authority over) are legally their property, and that it is their God-given right to abuse those children however they wish. As a result, they are threatened by attempts to empower children to protect them from abuse, as that would deprive them of victims, lessen their own power over children, and jeopardize their rightful place in the hierarchy. In order to pretend that they care about protecting children from abuse while consolidating the power to abuse children back into their own hands, they needed a narrative that they could spin to gain public support- and so we come back around to the "specter of the pedophile".
For decades now, from the Satanic Panic to QAnon, from antisemitism to the anti-trans movement, rich white conservatives have used the pretense of an epidemic of pedophiles sexually abusing children to simultaneously attack various social groups and reassert their power over children. This movement does not care about CSA- they fabricate narratives of minority groups (e.g. queer people, immigrants, Jews/Muslims) sexually abusing children to feign outrage over while their own organizations are awash with rapists and child abusers. It's not about the wellbeing of children, it's about power. Bills such as the UK's Online Safety Act and the US' KOSA claim to be protecting children from online predators, but in reality they're thinly-veiled attempts to censor the internet for everyone, to prevent children from being able to learn about or articulate the abuse they've suffered and ramp up online surveillance. This, as I see it, is what Patricia Taxxon was trying to convey before you stripped it of all context and tried to use it as evidence that she thinks CSA isn't real.
Now, to be fair, it's entirely possible that I'm the one misreading her sentiment, steelmanning a shallow post into an argument that she wasn't actually making. If you can delve into your endless folder of screenshots and find an explicit quote from her somewhere along the lines of her admitting that she believes sexually abusing children is morally acceptable, or that pedophilia as a phenomenon is completely non-existent and harmless, then I'll admit I'm wrong, both about her post and about her as a person. Otherwise, I hope you're willing to at least consider the possibility that you might be wrong about some of the things she says and believes.
Or you can just accuse me of also being a pedophilia advocate and start harassing me too. Your choice, I suppose.
